|
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE |
||||
|
|
||||
|
7. |
CONSIDER EXPENDITURE OF
FUNDS AND AUTHORIZATION TO AMEND CONTRACT WITH |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Meeting
Date: |
June 18,
2007 |
Budgeted: |
Included in Proposed FY 2007-2008 Budget |
|
|
|
||||
|
From: |
David A. Berger, |
Program/ |
2-5-5-A
and 2-5-5-D |
|
|
|
General Manager |
Line Item
No.: |
Acct. No.
4-7855.03-03 |
|
|
|
||||
|
Staff
Contact: |
Henrietta Stern |
Cost
Estimate: |
$25,000 ($20,000 is estimated as reimbursable) |
|
|
|
||||
|
General
Counsel Approval: N/A |
||||
|
Committee
Recommendation: The Administrative
Committee reviewed this item on June 7, 2007 and recommended __________. |
||||
|
CEQA Compliance: N/A |
||||
SUMMARY: The Board will consider authorizing the General Manager to amend an existing contract with Golden State Planning and Environmental Consulting (GSPEC) to help District staff carry out MPWMD Rules and Regulations governing Water Distribution Systems (WDS). The contract term would be for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007-2008 (July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008) for a not-to-exceed amount of $25,000. The Board previously authorized retention of GSPEC at its Dec 11, 2006 meeting for six months (January-June 2007).
The GSPEC proposal is included as Exhibit 7-A. The primary task (roughly estimated at 75% of the time) is to assist with permit review and processing, which is reimbursable to MPWMD by the applicant. The second task (roughly estimated at 25% of the time) is to help District staff complete formal Implementation Guidelines for the WDS permit process, as required by the MPWMD Rules & Regulations.
GSPEC’s work would be directed by the MPWMD Project Manager in consultation with the Planning & Engineering Manager and Senior Hydrogeologist. GSPEC’s work is also coordinated with the hydrogeologic reviews performed by Pueblo Water Resources. District staff has been pleased with GSPEC’s work to date -- GSPEC quickly learned the detailed Water Distribution System (WDS) permit process, helped staff address the backlog of Applications and Pre-Applications, and has made helpful suggestions regarding the format and content of the Implementation Guidelines, and is currently preparing first drafts.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the General Manager to amend the current District professional services contract with GSPEC for a not-to-exceed amount of $25,000 for FY 2007-2008. The GSPEC rate is $90 per hour, and is paid for time and materials on an as-needed basis. For budgeting purposes, it is suggested that reimbursable and non-reimbursable portions of $20,000 and 5,000, respectively, be identified. However, District staff requests that the $25,000 amount remain flexible in the contract to address changing needs. The Administrative Committee reviewed this item at its June 7, 2007 meeting and voted __ to __ to recommend ____. If this item is adopted along with the Consent Calendar, staff will execute a contract amendment with GSPEC for FY 2007-2008 consistent with the scope shown as Exhibit 7-A.
DISCUSSION AND IMPACT TO DISTRICT RESOURCES: The number of WDS applications and Pre-Applications received in 2006 was more than five times the annual total of previous years, and a severe backlog had occurred by the time GSPEC was retained in late December 2006. GSPEC helped staff address the backlog and should help staff meet its customer service timeline goals in FY 2007-2008 without compromising work product quality or adversely affecting other high-priority projects. As noted in the proposal, GSPEC plans to focus attention on the Implementation Guidelines while there is a temporary lull in new permit applications in late May, June and early July 2007. A new surge of applications is anticipated beginning in late June 2007, after the first dry-season pumping tests are completed and evaluated in the required hydrogeologic assessment to be performed by the applicant’s consultant.
The Board previously authorized retention of GSPEC at its December 11, 2006 meeting for a not-to-exceed amount of $25,000 for six months (January-June 2007); this was to have been split into two parts: $12,500 for reimbursable permit processing and $12,500 for non-reimbursable development of Implementation Guidelines. As of April 30, 2007 (latest invoice received mid-May 2007), the $12,500 portion for permit applications is being used at a rapid rate (78% of limit after four months rather than 66%); conversely, the Implementation Guidelines portion has not been used extensively (29% of limit after four months rather than 66%). GSPEC’s time for May and June 2007 should emphasize the Implementation Guidelines as new permit applications have temporarily slowed. Thus, by June 30, 2007, both accounts should be closer in balance.
Based on the invoices for January through April 2007, a total contract limit of $25,000 seems reasonable and prudent. There are more than 30 Pre-Applications which could become formal Applications in the next six-month period. Also, staff will ask GSPEC to learn more post-approval tasks to help staff improve the speed of permit processing. A refinement to the FY 2007-2008 budget is possible if actual volume is lower than anticipated. It is noted that all work related to WDS applications is invoiced to the respective applicants and paid before a signed permit is issued.
EXHIBIT
7-A GSPEC Proposal dated May 24, 2007
U:\staff\word\committees\Admin\2007\20070607\07\item7.doc